Public record
Software health reportschema 0.27.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-07-30 17:18 UTC

handsomejustin / easy_tdx

免费Python量化SDK:通达信协议直连 A股/港股/美股数据,内置技术指标、缠论分析、回测引擎与 Web 可视化,JSON 输出适配 AI Agent

PythonCustom license★ 636 stars⑂ 194 forkssince May 2026View on GitHub ↗
KindLibraryWeb interfaceCommand-line toolhow this is determined
#chinese-stock-market#financial-data#mootdx#pytdx#tdx#technical-analysis#a-share-tdx#stock-analysis#stock-data#stock-trading

handsomejustin/easy_tdx holds a health index of 67 out of 100, placing it in the Good band. It scores highest on Engineering Quality (69/100) and lowest on Security (43/100). It was last updated 17 days ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

67
overall / 100
Good

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

67
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 61 is calibrated to 67 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

毛利哥Personal account
26 followers72 public repossince Jun 201423

This repository is owned by a personal account. A single-owner project carries more continuity risk than an organization-backed one.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publish
PyPIeasy-tdx1.20.415,8048217 days ago

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

68Good · 21% of overall

Development activity

54Moderate
How it's scored
28.8/36Push recency — last push 17 days ago
6.9/36Commit cadence — 10/52 weeks with commits
18/18Commit volume — 289 commits in the last year
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
Inputs used
commits_last_year289
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push17
active_weeks_last_year10

Release discipline

90Excellent
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 65 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 17 days ago
27/27Release cadence — a release every ~0.6 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
Inputs used
releases_count65
latest_release_tagv1.20.4
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release17
mean_days_between_releases0.6

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

58Moderate · 17% of overall

Popularity & adoption

70Good
How it's scored
45.5/60Stars — 636 stars
19/25Forks — 194 forks
6/15Watchers — 13 watchers
Inputs used
forks194
stars636
watchers13
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history

Community health

44Weak
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
16.9/22.5License — license file present, not a recognized license
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges—
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_services—
has_pull_request_templateno

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

62Moderate · 23% of overall

Maintainer resilience (bus factor)

30At Risk
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
9.5/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 58% of commits
5.4/13.5Contributor breadth — 4 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled4
top_contributor_share0.58

Issue & PR responsiveness

73Good
How it's scored
33.9/42Issue resolution — 81% of issues closed
30/30PR acceptance — 9/9 decided PRs merged
0/13Newcomer PR acceptance — no first-time contributor's PR decided in 30d
0/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
merged_prs9
open_issues5
closed_issues21
prs_merged_7d—
prs_decided_7d—
prs_merged_30d—
prs_decided_30d—
issue_closed_ratio0.808
closed_unmerged_prs0
first_time_authors_30d—
first_time_prs_merged_30d—
first_time_prs_decided_30d—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Newcomer PR acceptance. Remaining weights renormalized.

Ownership & stewardship

57Moderate
How it's scored
10/30Ownership backing — personal (user) account
0/20Verified domain — not applicable to user accounts
10.3/25Owner reach — 26 followers of handsomejustin
25/25Track record — 72 public repos, account ~12 yr old
Inputs used
followers26
owner_typeUser
is_verified—
owner_loginhandsomejustin
public_repos72
account_age_days4,442
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Verified domain. Remaining weights renormalized.

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on pypi
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 17 days ago
20/20Version history — 82 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packageseasy-tdx
ecosystemspypi
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish17

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

69Good · 19% of overall

Engineering practices

58Moderate
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 3 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
0/16Linter config
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
10/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 4 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configno
has_precommit_configno

Documentation

85Excellent
How it's scored
30/30README
25/25Documentation directory
0/15Documentation / homepage site
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 10 topics
10/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicschinese-stock-market, financial-data, mootdx, pytdx, tdx, technical-analysis, a-share-tdx, stock-analysis, stock-data, stock-trading
has_wikiyes
homepage—
docs_site—
has_readmeyes
has_docs_diryes
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

43Weak · 16% of overall

Security posture

29At Risk
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
0/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection not enabled on development/release branches
1.2/2.5CI-Tests — 4 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0/7.5Code-Review — Found 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.2/2.5License — license file detected
0/7.5Maintained — project was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
1.5/5Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0/5Security-Policy — security policy file not detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — Project has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
1.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated18
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive0
scorecard_aggregate2.9

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
25/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — no indirect dependency carries a known advisory
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages7
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched the pypi:easy-tdx@1.20.4 runtime dependency closure — what installing the published package pulls in — 7 packages. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

58Moderate · 4% of overall

Agent context & guidance

40Weak
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
0/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 99 of 100 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtno
llms_txt_url—
legible_history_share0.99
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—

Verify loop (build / test / typecheck)

46Weak
How it's scored
0/18One-command bootstrap
22/22Automated tests
0/11Lint / format config
11/11Static type checking — src/easy_tdx/py.typed, web-ui/tsconfig.json
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
0/10Demonstrated agent practice — no agent-authored commits among the last 100
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
3/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — dependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilespackage-lock.json
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageno
bootstrap_files—
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configno
typecheck_configssrc/easy_tdx/py.typed, web-ui/tsconfig.json
agent_commit_share0
toolchain_manifests—
dependency_bot_commit_share0

Code legibility for models

82Excellent
How it's scored
27/45Type-checkable code — Python with type-check config (src/easy_tdx/py.typed, web-ui/tsconfig.json)
54.7/55Manageable file sizes — 2/389 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languagePython
largest_source_bytes74,718
source_files_sampled389
oversized_source_files2

Machine-readable interfaces

100Exceptional
How it's scored
0/40API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto) — not applicable to this kind of software
0/20MCP server — not applicable to this kind of software
40/40Runnable examples — examples
Inputs used
example_dirsexamples
has_mcp_signalno
api_schema_files—
interfaces_expected_of—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): API schema (OpenAPI/GraphQL/proto), MCP server. Remaining weights renormalized.

Key facts

636GitHub stars
4contributors
289commits, last 12 months
17days since last push
65releases
1bus factor
5open issues
npm, PyPIpackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 194 ⇿
0Stars
194Forks
65Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

0408012016020019482026-052026-062026-07
Major 0Minor 12Patch 53
OpenSSF Scorecard 2.9 / 10
2.9aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-07-30 17:18 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
0Branch-Protectionbranch protection not enabled on development/release branches
5CI-Tests4 out of 7 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 5
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
0Code-ReviewFound 0/22 approved changesets -- score normalized to 0
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
9Licenselicense file detected
0Maintainedproject was created within the last 90 days. Please review its contents carefully
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
3Pinned-Dependenciesdependency not pinned by hash detected -- score normalized to 3
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
0Security-Policysecurity policy file not detected
0Signed-ReleasesProject has not signed or included provenance with any releases.
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
2Vulnerabilities8 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 7
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
PyPIpandas>=2.0,<3pyproject.toml
PyPItzdata>=2024.1pyproject.toml
PyPIclick>=8.0,<9pyproject.toml
npmecharts^6.1.0web-ui/package.json
npmpinia^3.0.4web-ui/package.json
npmvue^3.5.39web-ui/package.json
npmvue-router^4.6.4web-ui/package.json
All dependencies 123

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 7 direct and 116 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
npmecharts6.1.0direct
npmpinia3.0.4direct
npmvue3.5.39direct
npmvue-router4.6.4direct
PyPIclick—direct
PyPIpandas—direct
PyPItzdata—direct
npm@babel/helper-string-parser7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/helper-validator-identifier7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/parser7.29.7indirect
npm@babel/types7.29.7indirect
npm@emnapi/core1.11.1indirect
npm@emnapi/runtime1.11.1indirect
npm@emnapi/wasi-threads1.2.2indirect
npm@jridgewell/sourcemap-codec1.5.5indirect
npm@napi-rs/wasm-runtime1.1.6indirect
npm@oxc-project/types0.138.0indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-android-arm641.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-darwin-arm641.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-darwin-x641.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-freebsd-x641.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-arm64-gnu1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-arm64-musl1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-ppc64-gnu1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-s390x-gnu1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-x64-gnu1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-linux-x64-musl1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-openharmony-arm641.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-wasm32-wasi1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-win32-arm64-msvc1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/binding-win32-x64-msvc1.1.4indirect
npm@rolldown/pluginutils1.0.1indirect
npm@tybys/wasm-util0.10.3indirect
npm@types/node24.13.2indirect
npm@vitejs/plugin-vue6.0.7indirect
npm@volar/language-core2.4.28indirect
npm@volar/source-map2.4.28indirect
npm@volar/typescript2.4.28indirect
npm@vue/compiler-core3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/compiler-dom3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/compiler-sfc3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/compiler-ssr3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/devtools-api6.6.4indirect
npm@vue/devtools-api7.7.10indirect
npm@vue/devtools-kit7.7.10indirect
npm@vue/devtools-shared7.7.10indirect
npm@vue/language-core3.3.6indirect
npm@vue/reactivity3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/runtime-core3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/runtime-dom3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/server-renderer3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/shared3.5.39indirect
npm@vue/tsconfig0.9.1indirect
npmalien-signals3.2.1indirect
npmbirpc2.9.0indirect
npmcopy-anything4.0.5indirect
npmcsstype3.2.3indirect
npmdetect-libc2.1.2indirect
npmentities7.0.1indirect
npmestree-walker2.0.2indirect
npmfdir6.5.0indirect
npmfsevents2.3.3indirect
npmhookable5.5.3indirect
npmis-what5.5.0indirect
npmlightningcss1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-android-arm641.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-darwin-arm641.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-darwin-x641.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-freebsd-x641.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm-gnueabihf1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm64-gnu1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-arm64-musl1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-x64-gnu1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-linux-x64-musl1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-win32-arm64-msvc1.32.0indirect
npmlightningcss-win32-x64-msvc1.32.0indirect
npmmagic-string0.30.21indirect
npmmitt3.0.1indirect
npmmuggle-string0.4.1indirect
npmnanoid3.3.15indirect
npmpath-browserify1.0.1indirect
npmperfect-debounce1.0.0indirect
npmpicocolors1.1.1indirect
npmpicomatch4.0.5indirect
npmpostcss8.5.16indirect
npmrfdc1.4.1indirect
npmrolldown1.1.4indirect
npmsource-map-js1.2.1indirect
npmspeakingurl14.0.1indirect
npmsuperjson2.2.6indirect
npmtinyglobby0.2.17indirect
npmtslib2.3.0indirect
npmtslib2.8.1indirect
npmtypescript6.0.3indirect
npmundici-types7.18.2indirect
npmvite8.1.3indirect
npmvscode-uri3.1.0indirect
npmvue-tsc3.3.6indirect
npmzrender6.1.0indirect
PyPIcoverage7.14.0indirect
PyPIfastapi—indirect
PyPIfastapi0.115.11indirect
PyPIhttpx—indirect
PyPImypy—indirect
PyPImypy2.1.0indirect
PyPImyst-parser—indirect
PyPInumpy2.2.3indirect
PyPIpillow—indirect
PyPIpystray—indirect
PyPIpytest—indirect
PyPIpytest9.0.3indirect
PyPIpytest-asyncio—indirect
PyPIpytest-cov7.1.0indirect
PyPIruff—indirect
PyPIruff0.11.11indirect
PyPIscipy—indirect
PyPIscipy1.15.3indirect
PyPIsphinx—indirect
PyPIsphinx-autobuild—indirect
PyPIsphinx-rtd-theme—indirect
PyPIuvicorn—indirect
PyPIuvicorn0.34.0indirect
Dependency advisories 0

Installing pypi:easy-tdx@1.20.4 pulls in 7 packages, direct and transitive: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct dependencies.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Related records

Inspected repositories sharing catalogue tags or ecosystems with handsomejustin/easy_tdx. Read them side by side →

87JerBouma/FinanceToolkitTransparent and Efficient Financial AnalysisExcellent73chengzuopeng/stock-sdk为前端设计的无需 Python、无需后端服务、零依赖的获取股票数据 JavaScript SDK。Good94ranaroussi/yfinanceDownload market data from Yahoo! Finance's APIExceptional91wshobson/maverick-mcpMaverickMCP - Personal Stock Analysis MCP ServerExcellent90Verdenroz/finance-queryOpen-source API for financial data. Get quotes, historical data, technical indicators, and more.Excellent87pydata/pandas-datareaderExtract data from a wide range of Internet sources into a pandas DataFrame.Excellent

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.27.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — PyPI.